Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Alter road surfaces One study evaluated the effects of altering road surfaces on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that paved roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unpaved roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3504https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3504Mon, 06 Dec 2021 18:00:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/maintain road verges as habitat We found no studies that evaluated the effects of retaining/maintaining road verges as habitat on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3505https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3505Tue, 07 Dec 2021 09:57:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit road construction in important habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting road construction in important habitats on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3506https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3506Tue, 07 Dec 2021 10:00:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install barriers and crossing structures along roads/railways Sixteen studies evaluated the effects of installing barriers and crossing structures along roads/railways on reptile populations. Five studies were in the USA, three were in each of Spain, Australia and Canada and one was in each of France and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Survival (8 studies): Four of seven studies (including one randomized, controlled, before-and-after study and one review) in the USA, Australia, Canada and South Africa found that installing fencing and crossing structures did not reduce road mortalities of reptiles, and in one case the percentage of mortalities may have increased. Two studies found that areas with fencing and crossing structures had fewer road mortalities of turtles and overall reptiles. One study found that reptile road mortalities still occurred in in areas with roadside barrier walls and culverts. One replicated, before-and-after study in Canada found that following installation of tunnels and guide fencing, along with signs for motorists, there were fewer road mortalities of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. BEHAVIOUR (12 STUDIES) Use (12 studies): Six studies (including two replicated studies and one review) in Spain, France, the USA and Australia found that crossing structures with fencing that were not specifically designed for wildlife were used by lizards, snakes, tortoises, turtles and alligators and ophidians. One study also found that the addition of fencing around crossing structures did not affect the number of reptile crossings. Three studies (including one replicated and one before-and-after study and one review) in the USA and Spain found that wildlife crossing structures with fencing were used by gopher tortoises and 12 snake species, American alligators and lacertid lizards. One study also found that an American alligator did not use the wildlife crossing structure. Two before-and-after studies (including one controlled study) in Canada found mixed effects of installing roadside fencing and culverts on road use by turtles and snakes. One replicated study in Spain found that use of different crossing structures depended on species group. One replicated study in Australia found that reptiles used wildlife underpasses or culverts for only 1% of road crossings. One replicated, before-and-after study in Canada found that following installation of tunnels and guide fencing, along with signs for motorists, fewer eastern massasauga rattlesnakes were found crossing the road. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3507https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3507Tue, 07 Dec 2021 10:03:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways Fifteen studies evaluated the effects of installing tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways on reptile populations. Four of the studies were in the USA, four were in Australia, three were in Spain, two were in Canada and one was in each of Australia, Europe and North America and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one before-and-after study) in Australia and South Africa found a similar number of reptile road mortalities with or without culverts or wildlife underpasses. One replicated study in Spain found that the number of underpasses in an area did not affect the number of reptile road mortalities. BEHAVIOUR (12 STUDIES) Use (12 studies): Six studies (including four replicated studies and one replicated, before-and-after study) and one review in Spain, Australia, the USA and Australia, Europe and North America found that crossing structures, including tunnels, culverts, underpasses, pipes and trenches under roads and railways were used by reptiles, lizards, snakes and/or tortoises. One review in Australia, Europe and North America also found that wildlife underpasses were used by reptiles in only one of 13 studies. Three of four replicated studies (including one before-and-after study) in the USA and Canada found that desert tortoises, painted and snapping turtles and rattlesnakes and garter snakes showed a willingness to enter some, or all types of tunnel. The other study found that only 9% of painted turtles entered a culvert during a choice experiment. One site comparison study in Australia found that the area under an overpass was used by five reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508Tue, 07 Dec 2021 11:55:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install overpasses over roads/railways Five studies evaluated the effects of installing overpasses over roads/railways on reptile populations. Three studies were in Spain, one was a review of studies in Australia, Europe and North America and one study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that the composition of reptile species on a vegetated overpass was more similar to woodland on one side of the overpass than the other. Richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that a vegetated overpass was colonised by two reptile species each year over five years. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Occupancy/range (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that a vegetated overpass was colonized by 14 of 23 native reptile species and one non-native reptile species. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Three of four studies (including two replicated studies and one review) in Spain and Australia, Europe and North America found that overpasses not designed for wildlife were used by lizards and snakes and reptiles. The other study found that overpasses not designed for wildlife were not used by snakes or lizards. Two replicated studies in Spain found that wildlife overpasses were used by lizards and Ophidians (snakes and legless lizards), and one review in Australia, Europe and North America found that one of 10 wildlife overpasses were used by reptiles. One review of road crossing structures in Australia, Europe and North America found that a rope bridge was not used by reptiles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3510https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3510Tue, 07 Dec 2021 12:26:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease livestock grazing: Forest, open woodland & savanna Five studies evaluated the effects of ceasing livestock grazing in forest, open woodland and savanna on reptile populations. Two studies were in each of Argentina and Australia and one was in Mexico1. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (4 studies): Three of four studies (including two replicated, site-comparison studies) in Mexico, Argentina and Australia found that ungrazed and grazed areas, in one case with burning, had similar reptile species richness and diversity. The other study found that in areas where livestock grazing was stopped, combined reptile and small mammal species richness increased more than in areas with grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of five studies (including three replicated, site comparison studies) in Mexico, Argentina and Australia found that ungrazed areas had a higher abundance of reptiles and lizards than grazed areas. Two studies found that ungrazed areas, in one case with burning, had similar overall reptile or reptile and small mammal abundance compared to grazed areas. The other study found that grazing had mixed effects on reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3511https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3511Tue, 07 Dec 2021 13:43:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease livestock grazing: Wetland Two studies evaluated the effects of ceasing livestock grazing in wetlands on reptile populations. One study was in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that ungrazed sites had fewer bog turtles than grazed sites. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that ungrazed areas had similar overall reptile and amphibian abundance compared to that were grazed, burned or grazed and burned (to remove invasive non-native para grass). The study also found that unmanaged areas (no grazing or burning) had a higher abundance of one skink species than areas with grazing and/or burning. Occupancy/range (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that juvenile box turtles were present less frequently in ungrazed sites compared to grazed sites. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3512https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3512Tue, 07 Dec 2021 13:58:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise mowing height One study evaluated the effects of raising mowing height on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that in long-sward pastures or crops marbled geckos did not navigate directly towards a tree, whereas in short-sward pastures they did. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3513https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3513Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:11:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields Two studies evaluated the effects of creating uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields on reptile populations. One study was in Australia and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile species richness compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile abundance compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that uncultivated field margins were used by slow worms, common lizards and grass snakes, but not by adders. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:37:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide or maintain hedgerows on farmland One study evaluated the effects of providing or maintaining linear features on reptile populations. This study was in Madagascar. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in Madagascar found that reptile communities in cultivated areas with hedges were more similar to those found in forests than were communities from cultivated areas without hedges. The study also found that more reptile species were found only areas with hedges than only in areas without hedges. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3519https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3519Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:42:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide or retain set-aside areas on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing or retaining set-aside areas on farmland on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3520https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3520Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:46:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent access to livestock water feeders One study evaluated the effects of preventing access to livestock water feeders on reptile populations. This study was in Morocco. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Morocco found that covering water feeder openings with wire mesh resulted in fewer combined reptiles and amphibians being trapped compared to water feeders without mesh covers. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3521https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3521Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:55:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually remove reptiles from roads One study evaluated the effect on reptile populations of manually removing reptiles from roads. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One study in the USA reported that when turtles were being removed from a road following installation of a fence and artificial nesting mounds, fewer turtles were killed on the road than in the year before any interventions began. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3523https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3523Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:58:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signage to warn motorists about wildlife presence Five studies evaluated the effects of using signage to warn motorists of wildlife presence on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Dominica and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): One of two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the USA found that installing road signs reduced road mortalities of massasaugas in autumn but not summer. The other study found that installing road signs did not reduce road mortalities of painted or Blanding’s turtles. Two before-and-after studies (one replicated) in Canada and the USA found that a combination of installing road signs with either fencing and tunnels or a hybrid nestbox-fencing barrier resulted in fewer road mortalities of massasaugas and diamondback terrapins. One before-and-after study in Dominica found that a combination of using road signs and running an awareness campaign resulted in fewer road mortalities of Antillean iguanas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:05:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain or increase leaf litter or other types of mulch Two studies evaluated the effects of retaining or increasing leaf litter or other types of mulch on reptile populations. One study was in Indonesia and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Indonesia found that reptile species richness increased with the addition of leaf litter and decreased following removal of leaf litter and woody debris. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two randomized, controlled studies (one replicated, before-and-after study) in Indonesia and Australia found that the addition of leaf litter or cacao husks resulted in a higher abundance of overall reptiles or skinks. One study also found that removal of leaf litter and woody debris led to a decrease in reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3525https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3525Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:12:59 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Diversify ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops Two studies evaluated the effects of diversifying ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops on reptile populations. One study was in Puerto Rico and the other was in Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with natural ground cover had higher reptile species richness and diversity than those with bare ground, but groves planted with a single species as ground cover had similar richness and diversity as those with bare ground. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Puerto Rico found that two of three lizard species were less abundant in shade-grown coffee plantations than in sun-grown plantations. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with ground cover had more reptiles than groves with bare ground. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:18:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant trees on farmland Two studies evaluated the effects of planting trees on farmland to benefit reptiles. Both studies were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired sites study in Australia found that pastures with tree plantings had similar rare reptile species richness compared to pastures with no trees, but that more rare species were present with 50% canopy cover compared to 5% cover. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that farms with restoration planting (of native ground cover and trees) had lower reptile species richness than farms with remnant vegetation (of old growth woodland or natural regrowth). POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired sites study in Australia found that pastures with tree plantings had higher abundance of rare reptiles than pastures with no trees, and that rare reptiles were more abundant with 50% canopy cover compared to 5% cover. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3527https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3527Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:32:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install crossings over/under pipelines We found no studies that evaluated the effects of installing crossings over/under pipelines on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3528https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3528Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:34:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit vessel numbers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting vessel numbers on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3529https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3529Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:37:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing ditches on farmland on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3530https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3530Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:39:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit vessel speeds Three studies evaluated the effects of limiting vessel speeds on reptiles. One study was in each of Australia, Costa Rica and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Costa Rica found that in waterways with enforced speed limits, fewer spectacled caiman were found dead with boat-related injuries compared to waterways with no speed limits. One replicated study in the USA found that vessels travelling at lower speeds caused fewer catastrophic injuries to artificial loggerhead turtle shells, though vessels with jet motors caused no catastrophic injuries at any speed tested. Condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Costa Rica found that in waterways with enforced speed limits, fewer spectacled caiman were found with boat-related injuries compared to waterways with no speed limits. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated study in Australia found that green turtles were more likely to flee from vessels travelling at lower speeds. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3531https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3531Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:40:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install and maintain anti-predator systems around aquaculture that prevent entanglement of reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of installing and maintaining anti-predator systems around aquaculture that prevent entanglement of reptiles. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3532https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3532Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:45:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish protocols to reduce collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing protocols to reduce collisions on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3533https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3533Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:56:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Train vessel operators on appropriate avoidance techniques to reduce collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of training vessel operators on appropriate avoidance techniques to reduce collisions. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3534https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3534Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:58:45 +0000